Amusing comments yesterday from Peter Kafka of the WSJ on the growing complexity of online measurement. Though I appreciate the ‘extortion’ sentiment of the writer, the scenario is a bit more complex than comScore (or Nielsen) simply forcing fees from participants.
First off, methodology issues aside, it makes sound business sense that both companies make improvements to their services catering specifically to the largest media players, the folks paying their bills.
Existing panel-only systems and services have always favored the larger media players. Online panels typically identify only 30-40K sites on a monthly basis. This was ‘good enough’ for marketers and media buyers when the only dimension of audience measurement in the digital space was a website.
To be sure, this is not a perfect measurement, even for the sites who make the sample size cutoff. In addition to workplace measurement challenges mentioned by Kafka, existing panel-only approaches also face difficulties consistently tracking students, Mac users (none exist in either service), not to mention the growing number of consumers now accessing digital content on ‘smart’ devices and other emerging technology platforms. (Where does Apple’s new ‘Jesus’ tablet fit into the measurement mix?)
Inject audio, video, social media, microsites (both size and half-life), twitter feeds, etc, into the media mix and we now have an evolving digital media landscape that panel companies simply cannot measure alone.
Enter Hybrids
Reaction from the top players – offer ‘panel-centric’ hybrids to address the growing gaps in their depth of reporting.
The premise – provide the advantages of third-party measurement (demos, competitive, etc) with the added data signal to go deeper with each media participant. More data sounds better and, in many cases, these ‘hybrid’ solutions can offer just that.
The reality, however, is a much more complex and potentially confusing measurement landscape. Existing hybrids currently in the marketplace are a combination of panels and some form of site-based data. These ‘ingredients’ likely still contain any pre-existing biases before pairing. They DO NOT just miraculously disappear when combined with other data sources.
On the site side, cookie deletion, tagging inconsistencies, bots, spiders, etc, may impact traffic results. On the panel side, all the measurement challenges mentioned previously would likely still be present.
Bake a cake with bad eggs… bad cake.
Kafka mentions two examples in his piece, AOL and thestreet.com, in which hybrid results differ from panel only. However, look at ANY site with discrete forms of content (audio, video, microsites, etc) or sites that just make the panel sample ‘cutoff’ and there will likely be a significant delta for audience results of the panel vs. the hybrid solution.
So what?
Instead of labeling comScore’s and Nielsen’s new hybrid efforts as a mea culpa of previous measurement sins, as an industry we should applaud their fine efforts to improve measurement, marking recent events as the end of the “Measurement Cold War.’ The end of grueling comScore vs. Nielsen (quantity vs. quality) battles with only limited input or competition from other stakeholders in the Digital Marketing Ecosystem (publishers, marketers, data suppliers, etc).
We now have the beginnings of a multi-polar digital measurement world in which multiple voices – marketers, publishers, and a growing number of vendors will ALL provide data to the mix, and thus ALL have prominent voices in future measurement solutions. Nielsen, comScore and other respected measurement entities are not diminished by such moves, but now must learn to evolve their services to be much more flexible, timely, and transparent in this new measurement dynamic.
Not convinced? Go to any credible publisher, agency or marketer and see the data integration platforms either in place or in the planning stages. They are NOT waiting for a vendor to solve their measurement or performance woes; they are creating solutions for themselves or through partnerships with other companies.
In many cases they are circumventing measurement vendors entirely, creating solutions focusing on targeting and performance, critical issues typically set apart from existing syndicated audience measurement solutions.
Agencies are clearly prominent in this discussion. Razorish, Digitas, Media Contacts, Mindshare, etc, so many of the leading digital shops worldwide do much more than collect and report on digital campaign performance. They have extremely sophisticated analytical practices offering an evolving array of measurement solutions for their important and increasingly ‘performance-driven’ client base.
Further:
- Why did Google buy DoubleClick?
- Why did Microsoft acquire RAPT and Atlas?
- Why did WPP buy Compete, Dynamic Logic and 24/7 Real Media?
- Why did Quantcast initially spook comScore?
Connecting the Dots
Audience measurement is just one single dimension of data in the Digital Marketing Ecosystem. These firms and many others involved in the ecosystem realize that they MUST connect the dots between strategy, audience measurement, targeting, campaign deployment, optimization and performance analysis. Up to now many marketplace solutions operated in silos. It’s VERY DIFFICULT to connect the measurement dots in such an environment.
Though ‘hybrid’ solutions point to a path the industry will likely take in the years ahead, we have only begun to figure out what the measurement term ‘hybrid’ actually means.
- One-part site, two-parts panel? What is the right mix of data ingredients?
- Can surveys or other behavioral data play a role in hybrid solutions?
- Who owns or controls the data in multiple source/multiple owner solutions?
In addition, there are currently no IAB, OPA, or AAAA guidelines for hybrids. Also, there are no ‘completed’ audits of hybrid solutions from the Media Ratings Council. There are many conversations on all of these fronts, but no conclusions just yet.
The positive to all of this and it’s a BIG positive – there are now many more potential voices to be heard in the digital measurement discussion.
So back to Kafka… Sir, don’t worry so much about the new fees. If publishers and marketers do not want to pay either Nielsen or comScore, they shouldn’t pay it. They should come up with measurement solutions on their own or with partners.
They may be surprised who will listen and… who knows?
Maybe someday comScore, Nielsen and other vendors will pay publishers and marketers for the privilege of using their data?
Tags: measurement, media // Comments Off
Of course most households do not need ALL these boxes; consider the multiple options just for Netflix. Besides being a bit of a tech geek, I have them all to prove a point; declining consumer expectations to expect one box, namely a cable box, to provide all video needs.
