Many articles about TV topics continue to assume that "TV" still means that
bulky, small-screen, squarish, CRT TV, with fuzzy, grainy, ghosty image, washed
out color, and crappy sound, capable only of showing one-way, scheduled TV
content. Oh, with all manner of round plastic knobs. Some even show pictures to
convey this view. The first half of this article about ads does much the same,
equating "TV ads" with 1948 technology.
Any existing streaming TV platform, for the past many years, is capable of
showing TV ads that are targeted better than they were in 1948. I'm not saying
that ads are targeted in hyper-granular ways, but they could be. Virtually all
streaming is unicast these days, so the servers know exactly where each stream
is going. That knowledge could be put to good use, potentially anyway. This is
not the case with legacy cable or OTA broadcast (and it's counterproductive
with IP multicast too, for that matter), but why are we pretending that
virtually all TV is viewed the old way?
More and more people have quit watching TV that way, and yet even when
streamed, the ads have hardly disappeared. Says to me that if TV ads should do
just fine in the future, especially because you can't fast-forward over ads
that are streamed (unless you can record the stream, which is not as trivial to
do as using a legacy PVR). If TV ads are still not adequately targeted, it's
not for shortcomings of the delivery tech.
Then there's this:
"With ATSC 3.0 on the fast track to roll out, the future of tech-enabled
television advertising is bright. The technology has been tested successfully
in several markets, and a number of broadcasters and hardware companies
showcased its diverse capabilities in the 'NextGen TV Hub' at the NAB Show.
"While it may take years for the full impact of ATSC 3.0 to be realized, every
stakeholder in the game is expected to benefit. Over-the-air viewers will have
OTT-style on-demand options. Advertisers can explore new realms of possibility
for targeting and personalization ..."
The usual hype? Push comes to shove, it's only Internet streaming, which needs
no ATSC 3.0, that would enable any of these features. That's available today.
For a change, it would be really nice to have articles such as this explain how
they think this targeted ads, or personalization, or on demand viewing, would
work, with ATSC 3.0 broadcast, and explain why you think ATSC 1.0 can't do as
much. For example, explain how features of A/336 cannot be provided entirely
with Internet links, without having to rely on any broadcast signal.
I think that even non-technical people can get these basics. All one has to do
is resist the urge of taking lazy leaps of faith, or taking for granted what
the marketers are blabbing. Also resist the urge of saying "all it needs is a
backchannel," which is far from true.
Any feature, that isn't strictly one-way-to-everyone "live" broadcast, becomes
the responsibility of a two-way Internet connection to the TV set, STB, or
mobile device, and not the broadcast signal. Which means, when/as/if
broadcasters *are* capable of providing such features (personalization, on
demand content, targeted ads), via Internet links to these devices, don't we
wonder why would they need to bother with that one-way-to-everyone broadcast
signal at all?
Bert
---------------------------------------------
http://www.tvtechnology.com/broadcast-engineering/0029/lessons-for-tv-from-ad-technology/280960
Ad Technology Lessons for TV
The coming dynamic advertising revolution
May 3, 2017
By Gil Becker
TV advertising has shown a surprising resilience to the massive paradigm shift
driven by digital ubiquity, with annual ad spending predicted to hit $195B in
2017. But this financial boon is tenuous at best, as services like YouTube's
recently-announced streaming TV service position themselves as attractive and
ad-less, if not ad-free, alternatives.
While streaming services can be credited with increasing cord-cutting, the TV
advertising model can also be seen as a contributor to the format's eventual
decline, based on the reality that the commercial production process has
stubbornly resisted change. The business operates the same as it always has:
brands hire creative agencies who conceive of campaigns based on 30-second
spots that are specifically designed for viewing on a television set. As the
viewing public changes their consumption habits and OTT platforms have evolved,
several clear problems with the current model have become apparent.
1. Television targeting misses the mark
As a mass medium, TV requires advertisers buy against content and broad
standard audiences, not granular audiences. While an ad may hit the core
target, it will also reach a large number of unintended viewers, which is
wasted spend.
2. Channel-based ad placement is too broad
Whereas ad planners routinely customize the creative of their campaigns for
different media such as TV, out-of-home and radio, they produce a limited
number of creatives for each regardless of how many different audiences within
each there may be. For example, Syfy and MSNBC may both be TV networks, but
they have distinctly different audiences as well as distinctly different
channel effects that change the message received by viewers.
3. The 30-second spot wastes resources
The advertising industry is still configured with TV as the apex channel and
the 30-second spot as favored format. So brands will spend millions on ad
production and more millions on air time, and that 30 seconds is totally
unnecessary in an environment with short attention spans and DVR fast forward
buttons.
On the plus side, emerging technologies place TV advertising on the brink of
revolution. We now have the ability to make dynamic advertising that can be
delivered via online and connected TV platforms (and soon with over the air
broadcasting via ATSC 3.0, aka "Next Gen TV"), and the promise of
personalization can be a reality. And consumers are far more likely to respond
to a call to action that speaks to them. In fact, ads with dynamically
customized creative can result in up to 70 percent greater viewing completion
online.
So why don't we have more personalized TV ads? Well, it's that stubborn process
of production that has put up a strident defense to what could drive increased
efficiency and effectiveness.
1. Creative agencies and technology vendors need to work together
Currently, the push to dynamic video advertising is being driven by technology
vendors, not ad creatives. If the two don't begin working as partners, then
creative agencies will likely struggle to justify their ongoing role beyond
concept creation, else brand clients simply brush them out of the way.
2. CMOs need to understand that variation can happen without additional
complexity
One of the biggest misconceptions driving concerns about dynamic video ads is
the belief that producing multiple creative components for multiple ad variants
of ads will multiply the production's complexity. As long as you factor a
multi-variant ad into a shoot from the storyboard stage, then a dynamic ad
needn't cost more than a single linear 30-second ad unit.
While a TV ad may require sign-off, all of the individual dynamic components
don't necessarily. Today, ads can be created incorporating snippets of premium
content that have been rights-cleared well ahead of time.
3. Brands should learn that upgraded results don't mean exponential costs
One of the most common fears of dynamic ad creation is: "If I have to produce
10 variants of an ad instead of just one, will my costs increase ten-fold?"
The answer is a firm "no." Producing creative for the new era of delivery is a
much simpler equation.
Brands shouldn't have to cut costs in production to make dynamic add up; some
of the best ads look and feel like the money spent on them. But it is typical
for a dynamic creative production to cost roughly 10 percent more than a
standard creative.
While any additional cost may not be music to the ears of the brand, in the end
the benefits of increased ad efficiency and enhanced results must be weighed.
Outcomes include longer watch times, higher interactive engagement, stronger
brand resonance, and a greater likelihood of click-throughs from clickable
videos-all of which can offset fears of added costs.
With ATSC 3.0 on the fast track to roll out, the future of tech-enabled
television advertising is bright. The technology has been tested successfully
in several markets, and a number of broadcasters and hardware companies
showcased its diverse capabilities in the "NextGen TV Hub" at the NAB Show.
While it may take years for the full impact of ATSC 3.0 to be realized, every
stakeholder in the game is expected to benefit. Over-the-air viewers will have
OTT-style on-demand options. Advertisers can explore new realms of possibility
for targeting and personalization along with a level of interactivity that only
the web has supported to date. For broadcasters, the standard opens the door to
the ever-growing amount of mobile-device based viewing along with higher
revenues from this advertising that is more targeted, relevant and effective.
Ultimately, dynamic video advertising has the potential to revolutionize the
video industry, as a whole, not just digital video. We just need everyone in
the value chain to work together to ensure that the transformative tools and
emerging technologies now at our disposal are implemented at scale and in a way
we all benefit from the next era ahead.
Gil Becker is an accomplished advertising technology executive with nearly 20
years of experience leading operations and product development for high-tech
companies. He is currently CEO of AnyClip. He can be reached at gil@xxxxxxxxxxx.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.