YouTube has been broadcasting its intentions (pun intended) to join the ranks of TV programmers ever since it held its first upfront last year.
And with the next upfront season right around the corner, YouTube is upping the ante again to insert itself into the connected TV conversation.
But will TV programmers accept this latest contender – or pretender – into their midst?
Probably not, or at least not willingly.
Broadcasters are already doing whatever they possibly can to stand out during what I like to call the baby boom of ad-supported streaming. And they sure as heck don’t want the likes of user-generated content (UGC) added to the competition.
UGC you later
Now that YouTube is barreling into the CTV space, legacy programmers are putting their collective foot down about what counts as premium content.
Paramount and NBCUniversal both held recent tech conferences that featured stringent naysayers of lumping UGC and CTV together, because the two are just too different. NBCU also just added a content quality index to compare ad impact on UGC versus premium TV content.
Programmers do have data to back up their concerns. Some studies indicate that ads in UGC have lower brand recall compared to their 15- and 30-second counterparts that run within TV content.
It makes sense. As a consumer, I’ll admit that I skip YouTube ads whenever I can find my remote in time … when there’s a remote to find, that is. 📺
For good measure
Broadcasters also disagree with YouTube’s approach to measurement – and so do agencies.
YouTube suggests that any video ad on screen for at least two seconds should count as a CTV ad impression, in line with the Media Rating Council’s viewability standard.
But this standard was created for display video ads on a web or mobile browser, not for commercials playing on a large screen in the living room.
Agencies oppose applying web standards to TV in large part because they don’t want to pay premium bucks to run against user-generated content.
Advertisers shouldn’t have to pay the same price for skippable UGC ads as they do for spots in premium dayparts, Kelly Metz, managing director of advanced TV activation at Omnicom Media Group, declared from Paramount’s stage last week.
Making room
But the lines between TV content and UGC are set to get even blurrier.
This week, the Advertising Research Foundation (ARF) proposed expanding the definition of “TV households” to “TV-accessible households” that stream TV content but via non-TV devices.
If that proposal wins industry acceptance, ad impressions on web and mobile YouTube streams could count as TV ad exposures.
TV programmers don’t want even YouTube ads on connected TV to count as premium TV impressions, let alone mobile and web ad exposures. But it might be out of their hands.
What does YouTube think?
Based on my daily YouTube binge sessions, which typically include user-produced compilations of Reddit’s “Am I The A**hole?” stories, even YouTube appears unsure whether to consider itself a streaming service.
I mean, sure, viewers can choose between watching YouTube’s library of UGC on a connected TV device (as I do) or they can tune into YouTube TV, which works more like a virtual multichannel video programming distributor (such as Fubo, née FuboTV).
But either way, YouTube is positioning itself as a rival to streaming services.
Which is why I found it odd that YouTube served me two ads for Hulu Originals during one 20-minute stream this week.
In my view, if YouTube truly considers itself to be in the same category as other connected TV publishers, it wouldn’t be promoting streaming services owned by other programmers, which are direct competitors.
Even though YouTube lets me watch UGC for free, showing Hulu ads could attract my attention elsewhere. If these Hulu ads had piqued my interest, I might decide to hop on over to Hulu and spend less time watching YouTube.
I reviewed the ad experiences of no fewer than four AVOD streaming services so far this year, and I haven’t seen a single ad for a competing streaming service. (I exempt Hulu showing me an ad for a Disney movie in theaters, because Disney owns two-thirds of Hulu.)
Perhaps YouTube isn’t cut from the same cloth as legacy TV broadcasters.
What I’m wondering is: Will the TV industry ever consider YouTube as premium video?
Let me know what you think. Hit me up at alyssa@adexchanger.com.
