The top media trends that consumers don’t even know about

No hay notas en la diapositiva.

We are all here today at Tendensdagen speaking and learning about trends in marketing and I’m sure you’ve heard a lot of interesting things about that today.
What I’m going to talk about is Top Media Trends that Consumers don’t even know about.
So why did I come up with this title? The purpose of this presentation is to move a step back from what we in the marketing world speak about, about the newest shiny thing and the big buzz word of the year – and see what this actually looks like from the perspective of the consumer – just the normal people?
And why does this matter? Because we all know that how people feel about marketing trends– or how they perceive them, because they most probably are not even be aware of them - and how they feel about advertising, will also impact how they feel about your brands. And this will impact the long term financial success of your companies. And at the end of the day that’s what matters the most in our world.

There are many Media Trends that the marketing world is speaking about and on which I had to chose from: digital, mobile, programmatic, the internet of things, multiscreening, native advertising, and so on…

But I’m going to focus just on 3 major trends today:
Firstly, the very overarching trend in Media: Digital. Most media topics are related to digital these days
Secondly, Online Video is another trend which we speak about in advertising. However, from a consumer perspective, is there actually such a thing as online video or is it just TV ads everywhere?
Thirdly, it would have been difficult to not speak about programmatic – there is not one single day without any news on that topic. The question here is what this trend means for Display advertising, will it give it a second chance?

I have to admit that with the last two topics I’ve fallen myself into the “it’s all about digital” trend trap!

Media trends are all about Digital these day. But is it really all like that? What happens with other more traditional channels? Besides TV, are they not relevant anymore?

If we look at recent ad spend data for Europe it seems obvious and it’s very striking how much the investment in Digital Advertising has increased over the past 10 years – this year it already takes up the highest share of all media ad spend!
From just under 10% in 2006 - It makes up about one third now – and this is higher than the share of TV.
Although we always have to keep in mind that half of digital spend is actually on search (SEO) – so it’s not all display or video advertising.

But once we look beyond this incredible evolution of digital and how apparently it changed the total media landscape, we actually realize that its growth has come almost exclusively on the cost of Print – this channel is declining more than anything else! Whilst the other channels like TV, Radio and Outdoor actually have remained stable over the last decade and will also over the next years!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: IAB Europe ADEX Bechmark 2014
Print includes Newspapers and Magazines

Digitals part of the spend was just about 7% in 2006, it’s 32% this year and will be 38% in 2018.
TV: 2006 29%, 2015 27%, 2018: 30%.
OOH: stable around 7%
Radio: stable around 5%
Cinema: under 1%
Mags: 15% - 7%
NP: 30% - 14%

Yes, it’s true that newspaper circulation is in decline but we are still reading them, we are still listening to the radio and still leaving the house - and long may that continue!

Here are some data from Sweden on people’s Daily Media Usage, and they show that most people actually still watch TV on a daily basis, and two third still listen to the radio and read newspapers!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE GLOBAL MEDIA INTELLIGENCE REPORT
Western Europe
SEPTEMBER 2014
eMarketer Team

Daily Media Usage Among Consumers in Sweden, 2013
Ages 9-79

And we also know that advertisers who still invest in these more traditional media can build their brands very successfully!

This is the evidence from our CrossMedia research database. It strongly indicates that we should not forget these other ways to reach your audience and which can impact your brand across the whole purchase funnel.
For example Print achieves a higher share of brand impact than its share of spend!
Whilst Digital is actually underperforming across most areas!
TV is a very strong awareness driver but is relatively weak in driving motivation.
We also know that Outdoor can be very effective and efficient, although I have to admit on the average here it doesn’t look too positive, but there is wide variation in performance. The issue with Outdoor is that often creatively the copy relies too heavily on TV to work. And then phasing can become an issue – it needs to be primed by TV. However we know that the potential is huge.

I guess many of you know who this man is: Sir Martin Sorrell – the CEO of WPP – who has pushed WPP more into digital, he has recently supported traditional media, especially Print:
He said that “There is an argument at the moment going on about the effectiveness of newspapers and magazines, even in their traditional form, and maybe they are more effective than people give them credit [for].”
So let’s have a more detailed look at this argument on Print.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://adage.com/article/media/wpp-ceo-martin-sorrell-lends-support-print-media/297807/
Mr. Sorrell cited research showing that traditional media is often more engaging than digital content.
March 27, 2015
Mr. Sorrell cited research showing that traditional media is often more engaging than digital content. His remarks are important because WPP, which owns media-buying powerhouse GroupM, steers billions in advertising budgets to various media.
Mr. Sorrell has pushed WPP more into digital, and it remains one of the company's strategic priorities, accounting for more than a third of the group's revenue in 2014. WPP projects new media will make up 40% to 45% of its revenue over the next five years.

http://www.warc.com/LatestNews/News/EmailNews.news?ID=35382&Origin=WARCNewsEmail&CID=N35382&PUB=Warc_News&utm_source=WarcNews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WarcNews20150914
Sir Martin Sorrell believes too much marketing emphasis has been placed on digital and that the pendulum will swing back towards traditional print and TV.
14 September 2015But that doesn't mean a return to the status quo ante, the head of WPP, the global agency holding company, told the Future Forum conference in Sydney, organised by The Newspaper Works. "People are still going to read, they're still going to watch, but they're going to read and watch in a different way," he said.

Our data show that the impact per person (reached) in terms of driving Motivation to Purchase is even higher for Magazines than it is for TV! And Newspapers are not far off at all.
And the picture is very similar when we look at the impact on driving brand Associations/perceptions.

The reach of Magazines of course is lower, but the targeting which is possible with this channel allows to efficiently impact brand metrics; while newspapers can deliver broader reach meaning their impact is spread over more people.

So print communications remain a source of value and there is still a place for them in the media mix!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NP + TV: broadcast media
Mag: targeted media

Sue Elms: A place for posters and print in the media mix
http://mandmglobal.com/a-place-for-posters-and-print-in-the-media-mix/

The irony is that at a time when many brands are cutting these budgets, some of the most digital companies in the world clearly recognise the power of these “secondary” media.
Here are a couple of examples of Apple’s “Shot on iPhone 6” campaign from earlier this year which was using both Print and Outdoor advertising!
The campaign featured photos from users taken exclusively on the iPhone 6 and were printed on the back of magazines and on huge billboards across big cities in the world. I’m sure you’ve seen them!
And actually Apple has even won the Grand Prix in the outdoor category at the Cannes Lions for this campaign.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sue Elms: A place for posters and print in the media mix
http://mandmglobal.com/a-place-for-posters-and-print-in-the-media-mix/
While there is no doubt that digital enhances the possibilities for brand communications, and will play a major role in the future success of these media, we need to pause and see how poster and print communications, just as they are right now, remain a source of value. They should have a place in the mix.

The irony is that at a time when many brands are cutting these budgets, some of the most digital companies in the world clearly recognise the power of these “secondary” media.

The truth as our CrossMedia evaluations demonstrate is that great advertising in magazines, newspapers or traditional OOH remains immensely powerful.
Ad spend numbers may tell the story of an increased focus on digital, rightly so given how much more of our media time it now takes up, but you can take these things too far.
We should remember that many of these channels continue to deliver for advertisers, particularly when they are used to their best ability (and often when combined with digital channels).
The world isn’t ready to go 100% digital yet – and it may never be. There’s still a place for posters and print.

http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/apple-putting-users-beautiful-iphone-6-photos-billboards-and-print-ads-163235

http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/apple-tbwa-take-outdoor-grand-prix-billboards-featuring-users-iphone-6-photos-165516

http://creativity-online.com/work/apple-shot-on-iphone-6/39453
Apple has won the Grand Prix in the outdoor category at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity.
Apple's World Gallery campaign featured photos from users taken exclusively on the iPhone 6. The billboards are simple, with one caption: "Shot on iPhone 6." The billboards, meant to illustrate how the iPhone 6 can take high quality photos, were posted in 70-plus cities in more than 20 countries.

http://iheartbillboards.com/shot-on-iphone-6-campaign-displays-user-photos-on-billboards/#/

So we at MB believe that there is still a reason to invest in traditional media! We’ve seen that these channels continue to deliver for advertisers and some – especially print – are more efficient brand builders than digital.

Ad spend numbers may tell the story of an increased focus on digital, rightly so given how much more of our media time it now takes up, but we shouldn’t take these things too far.
The world isn’t ready to go 100% digital yet – and it may never be.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sue Elms: A place for posters and print in the media mix
http://mandmglobal.com/a-place-for-posters-and-print-in-the-media-mix/

The truth as our CrossMedia evaluations demonstrate is that great advertising in magazines, newspapers or traditional OOH remains immensely powerful.

While there is no doubt that digital enhances the possibilities for brand communications, and will play a major role in the future success of these media, we need to pause and see how poster and print communications, just as they are right now, remain a source of value. They should have a place in the mix.

We should remember that many of these channels continue to deliver for advertisers, particularly when they are used to their best ability (and often when combined with digital channels).

Second trend: Online Video. In the marketing world everybody is speaking about this. But are consumers too or are just seeing TV ads everywhere? I’ll explain why I’m saying that in a minute

Advertisers are spending more and more money of their media budgets on Online Video and it’s currently one of the main drivers of that digital spend growth that we’ve seen earlier.
In the last year (2014) Video growth was at least double digit in all European markets – the European average is 36% and in Sweden it has grown 59%!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: iab adex spend data
Video growth is at least double digit in all European markets
Video growth year-on-year in 2014 (%):
Europe average 36%
Sweden 59%

And from a consumer perspective, this increased investment in online video advertising is absolutely right, as people now spend a lot of time consuming video content from digital devices!

This is data from our most recent AdReaction research, a yearly study which analyses consumers' perceptions of advertising and this year focusses on Online Video and we’ve run the study across 42 countries around the world. The results have just been published yesterday, so you are amongst the first ones to see them!
The data I’ll show here are for Western Europe, incl. Sweden. There is also a detailed country report available for Sweden!
An important note on the sample definition of this study: respondents are 16-45 year old multiscreen users. Multiscreen users were defined as people who own, or have access to, a TV AND a smartphone AND/OR a tablet. The survey was completed via mobile.

Well, let’s get back to the data!
In Western Europe, Video content is viewed for 3 hours daily. Most of this video viewing is still on TV (live + on demand TV: 55%).
But all digital devices together make up almost half of the time!

Digital screens are almost as important as TV.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This report summarizes overall global learning. For data by country please visit www.millwardbrown.com/adreaction
For more detailed local country reports please contact your local MB office.

WESTERN EUROPE
Daily video viewing
Q: Still thinking about video content, roughly for how long yesterday did you watch…

So far so good. People spend more time watching videos on digital devices and brands spend more money there too.
But in Marketing we are caught up in the vicious circle of chasing the consumer who is always a step ahead of us. They are online and we need to be online. But we don’t stop and thinking about how, what and why…

Many brands make great TV ads – and they put them everywhere. But is this really the right way to do that? We don’t think so.

Of course online video is an important channel for extending the reach and frequency of their TV campaigns, it allows to get to those very light TV viewers in a cost efficient way.

But it ignores the fact that not all screens and platforms are equal!
All screens can achieve all brand-building tasks, but different screens do imply certain attributes and can play specific roles.
We know for example that TV can be very effective in driving awareness, but it is underperforming when it’s about making deeper connections with the audience and drive motivation. Online Video is performing better in this area!
Let these starting assumptions work to your advantage.

Let’s have a look at a campaign from the German supermarket Edeka. They used two very different creative approaches to promote the variety of their own-brand products.

Edeka ran a cute, but “safe,” more conservative TV ad featuring the variety of their own-brand products. Let’s have a look.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2fqHRkPCps

Edeka, a German supermarket, used two very different creative approaches to promote the variety of their own-brand products. The TV ad features children in a supermarket and is clearly aimed at a more conservative, family-focused demographic. The wacky online and viral elements are targeted at a younger, more fun-loving audience.

A much riskier, but memorable, “Supergeil” ad ran online – also featuring their own-brand products.
The star of the ad is the actor and electropop entertainer (I actually never heard of him) Friedrich Liechtenstein.
Let’s watch it about a minute. You’ll see it’s a bit surreal.

(play for 1 minute until the refrain starts)

The TV ad achieved relatively few views online.
Supergeil has become a viral hit. The last time I checked it had close to 15 million views.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxVcgDMBU94

The surreal ads feature the German actor-turned-electropop entertainer Friedrich Liechtenstein performing while sitting in a bath of milk, dancing through a kitchen and popping up in the boot of someone's car eating crisps.Read more at http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/campaign-viral-chart-edekas-supergeil-ad-leads-viral-hat-trick-german-retailer//1282751#2qKKjUg1FCX2Yk7M.99

Online video offers a great advertising opportunity to marketers, but the mindset of the consumer differs a lot between screens and devices, so for example we are typically more laid back when watching TV and more lean forward and goal-oriented when using a Laptop. With this mindset also the receptivity of advertising varies.

In general, people are more favourable towards advertising on TV – and less on digital screens. And the same is true for Online video advertising – where On Demand TV is more in line with the digital screens.

Audiences feel most in control of their ad exposure on computers.
Lower control over ads on Live TV does not damage ad receptivity (presumably due to acceptance of status quo).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WESTERN EUROPE
Ad receptivity & control by screen
Q: Thinking about all the kinds of ads you see in this place, how would you characterize your attitude towards the following formats of advertising? / How would you characterize your attitude towards the following formats of video advertising? How much control do you feel you have over whether you do or don't watch the following formats of video advertising?

We now have looked at differences between screens and that receptivity on digital screens is typically lower – but there are also variations in receptivity in terms of the different formats that you can use for online video advertising.

Beyond rewards-based ads, the audience prefers those formats that give them some control of their viewing like skippable & click to play.

So in order to overcome issues with receptivity in online video advertising we need to give the consumers more control!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This makes sense as we know in a digital world, we need to engage more with consumers rather than force things upon them. It has to be a two way thing where we give them something of value – this could be pure entertainment, or in this case something valuable to them like rewards. The desire to skip also makes sense as we know people are less receptive to digital content and slightly more lean forward in terms of how they engage on other devices meaning it makes sense they would also like to exert some control and skipping offers them this.

Marketing receptivity: sum of very positive and somewhat positive (5 point scale)

WESTERN EUROPE
Video ad potential by ad types
Q: Which of the following types of online video advertising have you ever noticed?
Q: How would you characterize your attitude towards the following formats of online video advertising?

However a world in which ads are skippable brings new creative challenges! And brands really need to consider digital early in the creative process.

There are many ways to help avoiding skip which we have grouped here. So, overall the ad and the power of the creative itself has the biggest role to play.
When we look at the reasons in more detail, we can see that Humor is the main way to prevent skipping ads.
And also very importantly: aim for early impact – engage and intrigue the audience in the very first few seconds is crucial.

Also good targeting helps avoiding the skip: so we have to make sure the ads are relevant to the audience because they are for a category or a brand which they are interested in.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WESTERN EUROPE
Reasons for not skipping ads
Q: “Sometimes video ads are shown online and you have the option to skip.
What makes you less likely to skip and more likely to pay attention to an ad?ˆ

The main lesson to take out of this is to really adapt to the complex online video world – don’t just copy and paste your TV ad.
So assume the need for adaptation and consider digital early in the creative process; even a great TV ad probably needs to be optimised for the online environment in order to make it work. And also consider wisely the formats you show your online video in.

I recommend you to go to our website where you can download the global report which also includes some very interesting copytesting of video ads in different advertising contexts: TV, YouTube skippable pre-roll, Facebook auto-play, Facebook click-to-play, mobile video). The ads we tested are from brands like Ikea, Nestlé, Honda, Heineken…

Now we are coming to third and last topic of today – one of the big trends this year: Programmatic advertising.
Display or banner advertising has been around for over 20 years (since 1994)! Almost as long as the consumer internet. And it has been argued over and over again that banner ads don’t work – especially as a tool for branding - and they have been declared dead already many times.
Some say that Programmatic will give Display a second chance due its more efficient media buying and it’s ability to deliver ads in a much more targeted way.

If we look at our data again, it’s true that the performance of online display campaigns varies widely and so it’s understandable that Advertisers are confused about using it or not for branding purposes.

These are data from our Brand Lift Insights database and the good news is that there is a lot of evidence that when display is done well, it has tremendous impact on all areas of the purchase funnel. You can see that the top 20% of campaigns are hugely impacting metrics from Awareness to Consideration.

And even the averages show impact across all metrics- however much less positive. But the worst performing campaigns have hurt the brands being advertised. For such important metrics like favourability and purchase intent there was a negative impact of 6 percentage points!

What is the reason for this performance of display advertising in driving brands?
In the world of brand building I would argue that this little number is the root cause – this 0.1% is the average Click through rate for banner ads in Europe.
The issue with this is that digital display has been focused on metrics which answer the wrong questions – clicks measure a behavioural response and for brand campaigns it only delivers part of the picture, it doesn’t measure the effect on your brand!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Europe CTR for Standard Banner 2013
Sizmek Research 2014

Viewability, engagement metrics like visits, time spent etc are just improvements to measure a behavoural response – but we need to measure actual brand response

http://www.warc.com/Blogs/Digital_advertising._Where_did_it_all_go_wrong.blog?ID=2151

From an advertisers point of view, and also for agencies and publishers, the failure with ad tech (aside from fraud, data-leakage, invasion of privacy) is that it is simply not able to deliver the necessary brand advertising part of the equation.
The internet’s inability to deliver on brand advertising means it is (today) no place to be if you want to build a brand over the next 10 years, and no amount of adtech is going to fix that because we have set up the web to only deliver direct response marketing in advertising clothing in the form of impressions and clicks - coincidentally the easiest things to fake and to track - and an ecosystem that rewards crap.

Well, we've squandered a lot of advertising money on dubious adtech and direct response advertising that's created no value for publishers, advertisers or consumers.

And this average CTR tells us that 1 in 1000 persons has clicked on the ad! That’s a ridiculously small number that represents the actions of a tiny fraction of the overall campaign audience. And if we use this metric to evaluate and even optimize the campaign on the flight this can be pretty dangerous.

Brand response is typically 30 times larger than click-through response (generating awareness shifts of three percent vs. average click through of 0.1 percent). A strong brand response campaign may look weak judged solely on behavioral metrics, and optimization based on behavior alone could actually make it less effective than otherwise.

More shockingly, how do we know that this one click was not a mistake?
A few years ago, someone from the Advertising Research Foundation did a little experiment. They launched several blank ads in different standard sizes, in two coloures: white and orange.
The average CTR was about 0.08% so probably not even too bad for brand campaign. However they then asked the clickers why they had clicked on the ads and half said they were curios and the other half said they had clicked by mistake.
This makes the reliance of this type of behavioral measures even more of an issue.

Not having clicked on the ad doesn’t mean you haven’t been impacted at all! Maybe it did make you more aware of the bran or it even change the perceptions you had on that brand – and hopefully in a good way!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ted McConnell is exec VP-digital for the Advertising Research Foundation recently reported a little experiment he conducted in AdAge: http://adage.com/article/digital/incredible-click-rate/236233/

He and some associates ran six blank ads in three IAB standard sizes, and two colors, white and orange. The average click-through rate across half a million ads served was 0.08%, which would be good for a brand campaign, and so-so for a direct response campaign. When asked half the clickers said they were curious, the other half admitted to a mistaken click.

As McConnell admits the experiment is not realistic, after all it was a blank ad, but he states,

“At a minimum, the data suggest that if you think a click-through rate of 0.04% is an indication of anything in particular, you might be stone-cold wrong.”

So if half the people who click on an ad do so by mistake what does that imply about the value of online advertising? ROI calculations based on click through start to look even more dubious than they do now. And yet we know that the overall effect of an online ad is far greater than immediate behavior would imply.

So let’s dive into exactly why I am saying it is bad practice to just use click through data to measure campaign success

It has been proven over and over again, that there is little to no correlation between a good click through rate and a good impact on brand metrics.

Millward Brown has a lot of data to prove this, as do many other research agencies and industry bodies. A sample of these sources are shown here.

So, what I am saying is simple really … do not assume that a high click through rate means high awareness.

Do not assume that a high click through rate means a strong impact on consideration. It really doesn’t mean that.

Programmatic advertising is exploding and it’s here to stay.
It’s estimated that by end of this year over 70% of digital advertising will be bought programmatically!

Will the targeting capabilities improve also the performance of display and kind of bring it to new life again, also for brand building campaigns?
Let’s first have a look at how this targeting capability looks like to the consumer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT IT MEANS: Programmatic Buying The use of technology and audience insights to automatically buy and run a campaign in real time, reaching the right user with the right message.

PROGRAMMATIC ALLOWS FOR PRECISE TARGETING
Based on behaviour, audience, time of day

Programmatic is a market-based system that enables buyers and sellers to automatically and instantly trade their digital advertising inventory
Around 50% of digital advertising was bought programmatically in 2014 – estimated to be over 70% by end of 2015
The model is similar to a stock exchange, where impressions – rather than stocks – are traded to deliver optimal value for buyers and sellers. Before programmatic, digital advertising was sold in bulk and was executed via traditional manual methods; a time-consuming and inefficient process.

Programmatic now offers a plethora of benefits for advertisers and brands, who are able to acquire the exact audiences they want to target at scale across multiple publishers and sites, reducing waste and increasing efficiencies. Publishers or sellers are able to place inventory into an exchange and sell at a reserve price to drive higher bids, and are therefore able to better monetise their site – all in real time. This is a vastly improved economically efficient mechanism that reduces the guesswork from the system of buying and selling inventory, and is now utilised by the majority of world's publishers and advertisers.

Some Lingo:
AD EXCHANGE An ad exchanges is a digital marketplace that enables advertisers and publishers to buy and sell advertising space, often through real-time auctions. They’re most often used to sell display, video and mobile ad inventory.
AD NETWORK A company that connects websites that want to sell advertising, then aggregates that inventory in a way that appeals to advertisers, usually via programmatic exchanges.
Traditionally, ad networks are all about audience reach, rather than premium context, though you can find some that aim for both.
DEMAND-SIDE PLATFORM
A demand-side platform is a piece of software used to purchase advertising in an automated
fashion. DSPs are most often used by advertisers and agencies to help them buy display, video, mobile and search ads. DSPs help make the buying process cheaper and more efficient by removing humans from parts of the equation, along with the need to negotiate ad rates and to manually fax ad insertion orders.
SUPPLY-SIDE PLATFORM A supply-side platform is a piece of software used to sell advertising in an automated fashion. The yin to the DSPs’ yang, SSPs are most often used by online publishers to help them sell display, video and mobile ads and to maximize the prices their impressions sell at.

Programmatic (whatever type) does admin tasks that humans have previously done – sends ad tags (detail of how the ad should look) and insertion orders (order form)

http://www.thedrum.com/news/2015/09/30/everything-you-need-know-about-programmatic
What this means is that an online rugby apparel retailer, for example, can take the guesswork out of targeting. Rather than simply making an educated guess which websites fans frequent – such as sports sites – a marketer can use data to target fans on any site that they’re browsing. And by targeting users on a one to one basis, a brand can build a real relationship – integrating relevant ads into a person’s overall web browsing experience.

Programmatic Explodes in Sweden
Two-thirds of publishers have made inventory available for programmatic
December 22, 2014
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Programmatic-Explodes-Sweden/1011743

The number of publishers in Sweden offering their inventory via programmatic nearly doubled between 2013 and 2014, according to polling by Sweden’s Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB Sweden). In October 2014, two-thirds of publishers in the country said they had made their inventory available for programmatic buying via a supply-side platform (SSP), compared with 34% in 2013. - See more at: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Programmatic-Explodes-Sweden/1011743#sthash.SkjjIYHk.dpuf

To better understand how the industry’s top influencers are currently leveraging programmatic technology, we interviewed over 175 senior U.S. Brand, Agency, and Publisher clients. Here are some highlights of what we learned—and what you need to know—about programmatic right now:
Programmatic buying is everywhere & major investments are being made.
Brand safety matters—for everyone.
Brands are getting more educated & publishers need to catch up.
Industry consolidation hasn’t yet impacted the operational relationships.
The benefits of programmatic have yet to be fully realized.

- See more at: http://www.aolplatforms.com/7-things-you-need-know-about-programmatic-right-now#sthash.raYQfmpd.dpuf

The digital evolution:
It all started with LOOK AT ME – we all remember these intrusive ads, popping up and interrupting our online experience – ads desperately calling for our attention.
Then we moved to behavioural targeting and retargeting – I’m following you!
And now? Programmatic allows for pinpoint targeting of individuals based on their interests – “I know you”

How do you feel about this – as a consumer, not as a marketer? I think it can be a bit creepy – and many people feel like they are being stalked or having invaded their privacy.
Actually this is something which came up in our AdReaction study as well – people are more willing to watch an ad which is relevant to them based on their interests (passions, hobbies) – however they reject targeting which is based on their browser history or their social media profile - even though this may drive interest-based targeting!
As soon as the targeting feels like stalking the reaction is really negative – This implies that advertisers need to be careful of being too clever or invasive with targeting approaches. Relevant is good. Spooky is too much

verbatims: privacy violated, stalked, someone watching me, spying me,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://mediatel.co.uk/newsline/2015/09/28/bbc-woes-pushbacks-on-programmatic-and-mobile-ad-blocking/

Apparently programmatic is the only future, the pinpoint targeting it provides eclipsing all other media channel pretenders. But if that's the case, why does everybody I know (at least, the small subset that even notices online ads) complain about being stalked for weeks by advertisers of things they've just bought?
Yes, they already bought the computer/blender/razor/whatever but surely the omnipotent internet can offer them other products.

http://mediatel.co.uk/newsline/2015/08/17/the-contradictions-within-the-programmatic-claim/

Programmatic - Prog to its friends - promises to deliver the Holy Grail of the right message in front of the right person in the right place at the right time. Even the right mood. In doing so, it also promises to clarify, simplify and make transparent.

Programmatic has been sold with some gusto as the marketer's equivalent of a very sharp needle whose tip can be placed (increasingly in real time) on a very specific target consumer. (Pace privacy hounds - not a named individual but a very accurately described type of person).

However at the end of the day, creative content has had limited evolution as the focus has been on the ad technology / targeting.
A pair of shoes is still a pair of shoes!

Before I’ve spoken a lot about click through rate, obviously an increasing number of behavioural metrics is now available: interaction rates, engagement rates, likes, shares, views, etc.

But the main issue remains: we are just chasing these numbers but none of them are replacements for attitudinal metrics – they don’t measure brand awareness, associations, or purchase intent which are very often the brand’s primary campaign objective.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While campaign reports once focused on click rates, these increasingly sophisticated reports are now enhanced with interaction rates, engagement rates, likes, shares, and many other behavioral metrics. However, despite their prevalence and apparent simplicity, all commonly used behavioral metrics have significant limitations. The bottom line is that none of them are replacements for attitudinal metrics (brand awareness, associations, or purchase intent) that are very often the brand’s primary campaign objective (see table here http://www.millwardbrown.com/Insights/Point-of-View/digital_blind_spots/Digital-Behavioral-Metrics.aspx).

Perhaps the biggest overall problem with behavioral metrics in isolation is that they represent the actions of a tiny fraction of the overall campaign audience. Brand response is typically 30 times larger than click-through response (generating awareness shifts of three percent vs. average click through of 0.1 percent). A strong brand response campaign may look weak judged solely on behavioral metrics, and optimization based on behavior alone could actually make it less effective than otherwise.

So what are the biggest areas to which behavioral metrics are blind?
1. Brand impact. No behavioral metrics accurately assess the degree of brand integration and the impact on brand salience.
2. Communication. No behavioral metrics can tease out communication of the intended brand messaging.
3. Long-term associations. No behavioral metrics can identify whether ads have changed opinions about whether a brand is meaningfully different from its competition.

So even with programmatic we keep making the same mistakes!
The algorithms are fed with direct-response KPIs (click rates, view rates, interactions, etc.), meaning they can be disconnected from a brand’s reality as advertising objectives for many large brands are often more focused on impacting attitudes!

So in order to make programmatic work, we need to consider also the psychological footprint of a campaign! And includes softer measures of brand health into the programmatic algorithms as well.

Think about what are your inputs? Just because it’s data it doesn’t mean it’s good data! Big vs smart data

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don’t lose sight of brand objectives in the rush to optimize programmatic based on behaviour

Programmatic advertising, which relies on algorithms to determine in real-time whether or not to engage a consumer, is a staggering innovation. However, those algorithms often rely on limited digital touchpoints, which ultimately overweight the importance of direct-response metrics and KPIs. Brands are becoming aware of this overweighting, and in the next year, they will increasingly demand that these programmatic algorithms also consider softer measures of brand health.
If programmatic algorithms rely exclusively on direct-response KPIs (click rates, view rates, interactions, etc.), they can be disconnected from a brand’s reality.
However, increasing positive feelings and associations for your brand is needed for long-term survival

For marketers, if programmatic algorithms rely exclusively on direct-response KPIs (click rates, view rates, interactions, etc.), they can be disconnected from a brand’s reality. Advertising objectives for many large brands are often more focused on building awareness, communicating messages, and moving brand attributes. These activities currently don’t have a traditional digital footprint; rather, they are psychological footprints in the mind of the consumer.

These psychological footprints can only be accessed via attitudinal surveys, and since this information will never be available for every person exposed to a campaign, marketers will need to develop smart approaches and innovative proxies to ensure that brand health considerations are reflected in programmatic algorithms.
A brand’s programmatic bidding strategy, and the technology that powers it, is only as good as data that is fed into it. Programmatic algorithms and systems will increasingly differentiate themselves not just based on their ability to manage cost effectiveness on behavioral metrics—their ability to do this while also delivering campaigns that build brand metrics is where the new battle is going to be.

To overhaul programmatic bidding inputs is a major challenge, but marketers will achieve this incrementally in three stages:
1. In the near term, advertisers will use new methodologies to conduct brand effectiveness evaluations of programmatic campaigns (ensuring that campaigns optimized solely based on behaviors are still delivering well on brand metrics).
2. In the medium term, advertisers will encourage programmatic partners to feed normative brand effectiveness learning data analyzed by site, ad, creative, and audience into programmatic targeting algorithms.
3. In the long term, advertisers will push to enhance programmatic algorithms beyond existing industry targeting variables to include richer audience psychographic and attitudinal data such as existing brand favorability.

See also:
http://mandmglobal.com/community/opinion/09-03-15/programmatic-beyond-persuasion-a-more-traditi.aspx

http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/New-Survey-Reveals-88-Digital-Marketers-Would-Increase-Ad-Spend-Digital-Branding-If-1919186.htm

Survey conducted by Millward Brown Digital on behalf of Media Brix

Of course these changes won’t happen until tomorrow.
Whilst we wait for further technological advances that allow for buying against brand impact, there is still the opportunity to use programmatic to deepen brand response by getting the creative right.

Creative is integral to ad effectiveness and profitability. The right creative can help your brand – or hurt it.While we know that many variables affect marketing success, creative is among the top influencers and creative goodness accounts for 50-75% of campaign impact.
This is not that different to other media but we don’t see the same care being taken with the quality of digital ads, the same way we do with other channels!
So first of all we need to improve the quality of digital advertising – both display and video – and additionally with programmatic there is the opportunity to create adaptive, smart excecutions – delivering the right message in the right context and to the right audience.
For example sequential messaging, where consumers are targeted with a series of different ads over the course of the campaign that tell an overarching brand narrative.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.marketingmag.ca/advantage/want-creatives-to-get-into-programmatic-make-it-a-game-136645
https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/articles/programmatic-merging-data-and-creative.html

WHAT IT MEANS: Programmatic Creative Digital ad creative that contains design elements, which integrate with programmatic and real-time bidding strategies. It enables advertisers to deliver a message that's tailored to the audience viewing it and the environment on which it's being viewed.

Programmatic advertising evolves by merging smart and engaging creative elements with existing media buying algorithms.

Marketers must challenge their creative & media agencies to work together to fully understand the touch points of each target and to deliver impactful messaging via highly adaptive (real-time) advertising.

Historically, programmatic ads have been simplistic and formulaic to enable the adaptability required of the format while processing the available information on a given person, but the ads themselves must now become more engaging to break through the clutter each of us experiences every day. To meet this need in 2015, creative agencies will increasingly partner with developers or build up their own advanced programming capabilities and cross-functional abilities to produce and deploy smart ads with customizable creative elements. The best of these executions will not seem “robo-generated” but will enable a new kind of dynamic, relevant storytelling based on when and how they are delivered.

Picture an existing programmatic model—you place an electric razor you are considering in your Amazon shopping cart. You later notice that several Facebook friends like that razor company. Banner ads start appearing for that razor across websites as you surf. A day passes and you receive an email with a coupon for 10 percent off your order. All of these “hints” ultimately lead to purchase, but it’s the 10 percent offer that sealed the deal. What if instead of these hints, an emotional connection could be built by delivering compelling, targeted, and timely creative? If this leads to the sale and could be scaled, an extra 10 percent margin would be the result—an attractive opportunity to reduce the cost of acquisition and sufficient motivation to get programmatic brand-building right. In addition to increased efficiency, the ability of programmatic to target very specific people at known points in the purchase journey should make the impact of delivering the right messages much more powerful. For example, bespoke messaging could be delivered to entice active considerers of specific competitive brands.

What will this evolution look like? In the near term, creatively adaptable programmatic will start with customized color schemes and verbiage to set the proper mood and tone. A next step is evolving video to be customized with distinct vignettes with smart sequencing or a “choose your own adventure” style determined via your digital behaviors and psychographics. For example, an individual execution could be made up of four variable elements such as color, message, vignette/scene, and product each with a number of options—three options per element would yield 81 creative variations (3^4 =81). Different permutations would be employed via real-time availability based on programmatic targeting variables such as age, gender, site visitation, and previous ad exposure. The result is a creative “tool kit” with smart options deployable instantaneously at key moments in the decision making journey, driving increased meaning because of the context and sequence in which they are delivered.

All in all, programmatic advertising will continue to evolve—the background algorithms will become more sophisticated, and the appearance of the creative will evolve to enhance the viewer experience with an increasing number of variables taken into account. Ultimately, programmatic creative will become more human, seamless, efficient, and easy to digest, and 2015 will bring the onset of this evolution. To achieve this, new skill sets will need to evolve beyond specialized silos to leverage a cross-functional talent set utilizing a mix of creative, technical, media, and research disciplines. Creative executions themselves will utilize mixable and employable elements as opposed to the current model of discrete “ads.”

Changes need to be made and soon – otherwise there will be an Adblockalypse!

It has been the hot topic over the last weeks, especially in light of Apple’s decision to allow ad blockers on its mobile devices-
Obviously there is a lot of panicking but it’s an important topic, because globally, the number of people using ad blocking software has grown massively over the last few years (41% year by year) – from just about 50 mio two years ago we are now at 200 mio!
Adblockers have been there for a long time but were rather niche –and now they are becoming more and more mainstream.

As many as 35% of internet users in some countries are using them – in Sweden it’s 1 out of 4 (25%) internet users using ad blocking software!

It’s the internet users’ rebellion against too many and bad creatives, stalker like retargeting and slow-loading web pages and we cannot ignore that.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As per a US survey the reasons to start using an ad blocker are mainly the feeling of private information being misused to personalize the ads (50%) and the sheer quantity of ads was the second reason (41%).

http://blog.pagefair.com/2015/ad-blocking-report/

From The Economist Espresso: Adblockalypse now: the threat to online ads http://econ.st/1iIuILz

Adblockalypse now: the threat to online ads
Ad blockers, already popular on computers, are spreading to smartphones, as users rebel against slow-loading web pages and surveillance-driven marketing. As many as 35% of internet users in some countries are using them. Apple’s latest update to its smartphone operating system, released two weeks ago, lets users install ad blockers, and they have since dominated the download charts. Blockers will wipe $22 billion off advertising revenue this year, according to a recent report. No wonder they are a hot topic at the annual Advertising Week conference, under way in New York. Some say they are unethical; others say they are illegal. But they are undoubtedly popular. Blocking is likely to accelerate a shakeout in free online services sustained by display advertising, and the shift towards “native advertising” (ads resembling articles). Its rise may also spur innovation in online-payment systems. That, at least, would be no bad thing.

http://blog.pagefair.com/2015/ad-blocking-report/
Globally, the number of people using ad blocking software grew by 41% year over year.
Ad block usage in Europe grew by 35% during the past year, increasing to 77 million monthly active users in Q2 2015.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34268416

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/19/technology/apple-ios-9s-enabling-of-ad-blocking-prompts-backlash.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=1
This about-face highlights the complexities around the ethics of ad blocking. Advertising underlies much of the Internet, making it possible for people to make a living off the Internet and create the content that users consume. By limiting ads, that implicit contract was violated, some publishers and advertisers said. More distinctions now need to be made around what qualifies as “good” online advertising versus “bad” ads that should be blocked, they said — though they were less clear on who would decide what constitutes a good or bad ad.

https://www.globalwebindex.net/blog/adblocking-is-more-common-than-you-think
GlobalWebIndex’s trendable 33-market data shows just how widespread this behavior has become in all regions. Globally, it’s now 27% of online adults aged 16-64 who say they are regularly deploying adblockers on their main computer; Europe tops the table on 29% but it’s the relative consistency of the figures across all world regions that is arguably the most striking trend here.

Summing up, avoid the digital blind spots that jeopardize your brand!
We need to move beyond the click and other behavioural KPIs and also measure and optimize campaigns based on the attitudinal impact that your brand campaigns have.
And we need to keep the channel in mind and create better online ads which are suited to that environment and wisely targeted.

A few final thoughts before I leave this stage

The overall effectiveness of advertising in driving brand impact depends on 3 key factors:
The quality of the creative content, the exposure or the delivery of the campaign to your audience in terms of hitting the right people and the right number of times, and as we’ve seen several times in this presentation, the Advertising Receptivity is a crucial factor as well.

However this Advertising Receptivity is at stake.
We live in the age of advertising plenty. Every day and in every way, we receive hundreds of messages from brands and the volume of messages that we see can be overwhelming.
But Ad overkill simply leads to an increased intolerance of marketing.

The danger is that in constantly pushing out messages the industry will damage its most precious resource – the willingness of consumers to receive them.

An analysis of our research data has shown that ad awareness at a brand level has been declining over recent years.
The ad awareness iceberg is melting.

If we continue to boost the volume and intrusiveness of advertising then the critical level of receptivity will continue to drop.

If our response to the increase clutter is to pump out more and more ads then we will ultimately make it even harder for advertising to be effective.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.millwardbrown.com/Insights/Point-of-View/Receptivity_and_a_New_Share_of_Voice/

http://www.mandmglobal.com/community/opinion/08-05-15/receptivity---advertisings-most-precious-asse.aspx

Of course, ad awareness is not the only reason for advertising, but it’s a sensitive indicator, linked to short term sales response, and it’s been nicely responsive to advertising for many years. However, after taking out the effect of creative quality and media weight, ad awareness at a brand level has shown declines over recent years.

We have always known that people have only a small place in their lives for brands but what does this mean for the future of our industry at a time when the ambient internet, pervasive and connecting data, devices, screens and sensors are transforming the media landscape.
Advertising and other brand content will be “always on” and targeted more and more tightly to contexts and situations and people, via the most appropriate device and screen. But the consumer will not all always be willing to receive that message. If we continue to boost the volume and intrusiveness of advertising then the critical level of receptivity will continue to drop.

We need to know more about the consumers who see our messages and their willingness to acknowledge or register them.
Unless we can track their receptivity (and identify the moments when it’s likely to be higher) then we won’t understand how we can maximize this precious resource.
If our response as an industry is to pump out more and more ads then we will ultimately make it even harder for advertising to be effective.

https://www.millwardbrown.com/Insights/Point-of-View/Receptivity_and_a_New_Share_of_Voice/
The receptivity challenge
We have to take notice of the diminishing returns in frequency and recency and stop excess advertising impressions. We need to demonstrate that share of voice achieved in the wrong way has an impact not just on the wider advertising industry but also their efforts.
Digital targeting and re-targeting offer us the chance to be more strategic in our messaging; after all if we can get the right commercial in front of the right person at the right moment, we can be more relevant, and have more impact.
However frequencies can be too high and re-targeting, if a consumer has visited an eCommerce site, for example, can reach excessive levels.
The creative response can be similarly irritating.

Key Takeaways
Brands should nurture consumer receptivity for the sake of themselves and the industry in general
Advertising content needs to be memorable, compelling and delivered to a receptive audience
Media needs to manage exposures responsibly putting audience receptivity ahead of share of voice, and at the heart of targeting practices
Research needs to put brand and communications receptivity at the heart of all consumer insights and be a true consumer voice

And we always have to keep in mind how the receptivity towards advertising will change according to the channel or format used.
Especially laptops and smartphones or tablets are very personal or even intimate spaces where we have to treat the consumer with an increased level of RESPECT and give them CONTROL over their exposure to ads when we want them to be receptive to our brand communications.