Audience beyond TV, and appeal beyond ratingsTV ratings have been the gospel for the broadcasting and ad industries for nearly 60 years. They are the yardstick by which our business has determined success or failure.
However, as we begin to turn our attention to this year's upfront market, the question we find ourselves asking is, Do TV ratings still stand up as a reliable and usable measure that advertisers, agencies and broadcasters need to make the right investment decisions? In a multiplatform, digital media world where engagement is as important as headcount, it's time to think about a different currency.
TV just isn't TV anymore
We must go beyond TV ratings to evaluate a show's true market value in terms of total audience size, value of PR and buzz, and program appeal.
They say that TV isn't what it used to be, and that certainly rings true. Networks in the US have expanded their content beyond telecast into multiplatforms that reflect the widening berth of TV's landscape.
We buy shows, not ratings
In Europe, advertisers buy ratings. In the U.S., they buy shows. TV buying in Europe has largely become a commodity, a mechanism to deliver an audience for advertising messages. A marketing director rarely questions the programs they are in, just the ratings, the reach and cost per thousand. Media auditors regularly track media buyers on prices paid and level of discount. Where the U.S. differs from its European counterparts is that here, TV is rightfully more than just a ratings number. Each program also includes sponsorship, integration and promotional opportunities as important parts of the buying consideration. This is not the case in Europe, because in many TV markets, the regulations restricting branded entertainment, sponsorship and product placement are so draconian that you are limited to literally buying the audience that is in the commercial break.
For U.S. advertisers and networks, quality does count and has a value. The show is a brand in its own right, and it is worth something for a marketer's brands to be associated with. Research shows that advertising effectiveness in high quality programming on average delivers 44% higher ad recall than in low quality shows.
Over the decades, 20-30 ratings gave way to 2-3 ratings that reflected growing industry competition and consumers splintered by choice. Mass marketing (and similarly, mass ratings) has given way to more targeted and sophisticated approaches.
Engagement: our staple currency
Despite TV CPMs increasing year after year, advertising recall of TV commercials has been in steady decline. In some estimates, TV advertising is eight times less efficient in the '00s as it was in the '60s. Engagement is of equal importance to TV ratings. We know from analysis of the market that program appeal and engagement are more likely to drive greater ad awareness and response. Yet TV ratings alone fail to address this need.
Research needs to broaden to address the current landscape. We should rank network and cable program size across broadcast TV, web, online video and mobile; its value in terms of PR and word-of-mouth buzz; and audience appeal.
For example, while reality programs have their share of criticism, it was found that a show whose viewers have a stake in the show or its contestants enjoys a more engaged and regular audience. The high viewer involvement in shows like "Heroes," "The Office" and "30 Rock" helped them to gain a much higher ranking than the TV ratings alone justified.
It makes sense the networks are leveraging the opportunity presented when consumers increasingly access and interact with the content in different places. This is creating a new economy for TV. There's no question that digital platforms are increasingly valuable to advertisers. So too is the interest and appeal that a program generates.
However, as we begin to turn our attention to this year's upfront market, the question we find ourselves asking is, Do TV ratings still stand up as a reliable and usable measure that advertisers, agencies and broadcasters need to make the right investment decisions? In a multiplatform, digital media world where engagement is as important as headcount, it's time to think about a different currency.
TV just isn't TV anymore
We must go beyond TV ratings to evaluate a show's true market value in terms of total audience size, value of PR and buzz, and program appeal.
They say that TV isn't what it used to be, and that certainly rings true. Networks in the US have expanded their content beyond telecast into multiplatforms that reflect the widening berth of TV's landscape.
We buy shows, not ratings
In Europe, advertisers buy ratings. In the U.S., they buy shows. TV buying in Europe has largely become a commodity, a mechanism to deliver an audience for advertising messages. A marketing director rarely questions the programs they are in, just the ratings, the reach and cost per thousand. Media auditors regularly track media buyers on prices paid and level of discount. Where the U.S. differs from its European counterparts is that here, TV is rightfully more than just a ratings number. Each program also includes sponsorship, integration and promotional opportunities as important parts of the buying consideration. This is not the case in Europe, because in many TV markets, the regulations restricting branded entertainment, sponsorship and product placement are so draconian that you are limited to literally buying the audience that is in the commercial break.
For U.S. advertisers and networks, quality does count and has a value. The show is a brand in its own right, and it is worth something for a marketer's brands to be associated with. Research shows that advertising effectiveness in high quality programming on average delivers 44% higher ad recall than in low quality shows.
Over the decades, 20-30 ratings gave way to 2-3 ratings that reflected growing industry competition and consumers splintered by choice. Mass marketing (and similarly, mass ratings) has given way to more targeted and sophisticated approaches.
Engagement: our staple currency
Despite TV CPMs increasing year after year, advertising recall of TV commercials has been in steady decline. In some estimates, TV advertising is eight times less efficient in the '00s as it was in the '60s. Engagement is of equal importance to TV ratings. We know from analysis of the market that program appeal and engagement are more likely to drive greater ad awareness and response. Yet TV ratings alone fail to address this need.
Research needs to broaden to address the current landscape. We should rank network and cable program size across broadcast TV, web, online video and mobile; its value in terms of PR and word-of-mouth buzz; and audience appeal.
For example, while reality programs have their share of criticism, it was found that a show whose viewers have a stake in the show or its contestants enjoys a more engaged and regular audience. The high viewer involvement in shows like "Heroes," "The Office" and "30 Rock" helped them to gain a much higher ranking than the TV ratings alone justified.
It makes sense the networks are leveraging the opportunity presented when consumers increasingly access and interact with the content in different places. This is creating a new economy for TV. There's no question that digital platforms are increasingly valuable to advertisers. So too is the interest and appeal that a program generates.
In Greece, TV executives need to push for a far better rating system. Research needs to encompass much more.
antweaver
antweaver
No comments:
Post a Comment