Tuesday, January 6, 2009

Rant on common media measurement Adnews 2008

Every six months or so the question of a common measurement system across online and offline becomes a hot topic. Supporters of a common measurement system argue that such a move would benefit digital advertising, by increasing the measurement and effectiveness of integrated media campaigns. If internet advertising is as effective as its proponents claim, then the benefits would flow to online and other digital media.  More ominous claims have been made that digital media faces an advertiser backlash, risking millions in billings unless a common system is developed.

Those against common measurement argue that such a move would be an enormous step backwards for digital media. Why would you take the most accountable media available today and “dumb it down” so it can be compared against the scant measurement resources of many traditional media? Why is it so important for digital media to conform when there is not currently an adequate way to commonly measure existing traditional media integration? With FTA and subscription TV moving closer to digital media over the next 5 years, why would digital media move backwards?

The heart of this debate reflects two different approaches to media integration. Both sides agree that the future of media will be more complex than the past, and that digital media is here to stay. That is reassuring in itself. The real difference in opinion lies in what we intend to integrate around, and how we measure effectiveness as a result.

The proponents of common measurement see the media plan at the centre of integration. Their hope is for a system that compares the impact, effectiveness and reach of different media within a fixed campaign or period. A shared set of measures would allow media owners, agencies and marketers to communicate with a common language around an ever more complex media landscape. Different media could be valued, and included in the media plan, based on its influence on common measurement criteria.

Not only is such a proposition fanciful, it is naive and outdated.

The core proposition around any common measurement is that different media alternatives have a comparable value, impact and purpose to each other. For example it would assume a relationship in impact, purpose and desired response between a TV advertisement, online advertising, outdoor, mobile marketing and email marketing and a direct mail campaign. I pity the advertiser who hopes to succeed under such assumptions. Some of media’s most exciting developments in search marketing, branded content and activation programs will fail to fit within such a model.

Agencies and marketers against common measurement see the appropriate object of integration as the client’s core business objectives. Media is selected and measured on its contribution to achieving the goals of the client, at each level of a purchase or marketing cycle. If awareness and simultaneous impact is needed, TV is a natural fit and we should buy and measure TV on its strengths and contribution accordingly. If online is considered, we should look at its strengths and contribution at each stage of the marketing cycle and buy against those criteria. At the heart of such a technique is an appreciation that target audiences react differently to media alternatives, at different times. It also acknowledges that consumers’ relationship to the media is complex – but not unfathomable. In place of secondary research and benchmarking, primary pre- and post-campaign research becomes more important in understanding campaign impact and success. Advertising becomes a continuous process of planning and consumer feedback. The media plan evolves accordingly and measures our progress towards tangible business objectives.

With our media landscape becoming more complex common measurement is an enticing concept. The end result of such an initiative would be to rob different media of its unique strengths and marketers of their ability to understand and maximize opportunities within media.

No comments:

Post a Comment