The Media Rating Council (MRC) and the broadcaster-backed joint industry committee (JIC) aren’t the only organizations addressing TV ad measurement. They are just the most public for their role in creating standards.
The 4A’s also has what it calls a “measurement committee,” a working group for media agencies to share thoughts and opinions about new trends in TV measurement. Those conversations could range anywhere from attention metrics to – you guessed it – currency.
This group came about because marketers and media buyers need advice on how to approach Nielsen currency alternatives – especially since most of the positive press about alt currencies is driven by the sell side, said Bharad Ramesh, executive director of research and investment analytics at GroupM. Ramesh is also the chair of the 4A’s measurement committee.
While publishers push alternative currencies with larger data sets that could report higher viewership numbers than Nielsen, Ramesh said buyers are uncertain whether these alternative currencies are ready. Newer data sets need time to mature and stabilize, while buyers need time to test them.
A recent report from the 4A’s measurement committee highlights both short- and long-term buyer concerns about new video currencies. In short, it says the ad industry is not yet prepared to transact on age and gender demos for national TV using alt currencies. It is simply too soon.
The 4A’s position is to “stick with the incumbent,” Ramesh said – for now, at least.
However long it takes for measurement to evolve, panels will always play an essential role, Ramesh said. Though the definition of panel has loosened to mean the “calibration” variety, not classic Nielsen panels.
Let’s break it down
As for alternative currencies, buyers are concerned about their current lack of MRC accreditation, as per the report.
MRC audits of measurement methodology are rigorous and time-consuming, which is why buyers have long considered accreditation a stamp of approval and trustworthiness.
While Comscore did receive MRC accreditation for national and local TV measurement in April, no alternative currency has accreditation for measurement solely with age and gender demos. While national TV measurement includes demos, they’re not the only ingredient. Rather, national TV measurement depends on average commercial minutes that are based on demos.
The JIC, which certified Comscore and VideoAmp for transparent and census-representative data sets, also pointed out its certification applies to “demos across aggregated impressions,” referring to ratings based on average commercial minutes.
Demo data alone – not aggregated into ratings – is important because it allows buyers to measure audiences across both linear and streaming, not just for national TV.
So, what’s the hold up with demos?
The short answer is time.
To use metrics beyond the average commercial minute, buyers need at least a few years of historical data to test so they can make sure reporting is stable enough for campaign forecasting. But right now, Ramesh said, it’s still too soon for them to feel comfortable transacting on audience and viewing data sets beyond that parameter.
The call for calibration panels
Another reason buyers remain uncomfortable with alternative currencies is because of how much they vary.
“When it comes to demos,” Ramesh said, “we are seeing wild swings” among currency providers reporting different data for the same campaign. These discrepancies make it very difficult to judge which currency providers are better than others, he said. (One viral example: Nielsen’s and iSpot’s Super Bowl viewership count differed by 3 million people.)
To address this, Ramesh said, the industry needs calibration panels.
Calibration panels are small panels designed for very technical use cases, such as deduplicating impressions and measuring co-viewing. Applying these types of adjustments to measurement reporting should narrow the wide discrepancy between vendors, Ramesh said.
Examples of calibration panels include TVision, which measures co-viewing and attention; HyphaMetrics, which licenses co-viewing and panel data to currency providers; and the Video Advertising Bureau’s panel, which it is supposedly working on, for personifying TV ad impressions.
What about Nielsen panels?
But Nielsen says its audience panels also address cross-screen measurement.
The difference between Nielsen and calibration panels is the former uses larger viewing data sets to correct or augment its panel data, whereas the latter uses panels to correct those larger data sets – the inverse approach.
Put more simply: Nielsen’s methodology centers on panels. But calibration panels are meant for measurement vendors that start with large data sets and look to panels as a supplement, not a starting point.
Alternative currency providers need calibration panels to help buyers get more comfortable with non-Nielsen vendors, Ramesh said.
And to be fair, currencies are moving in that direction.
Over the past two years, their tune has changed from dissing audience panels to acknowledging the necessity of calibration panels. Some video currencies now license data from HyphaMetrics, while iSpot and VideoAmp both have partnerships with TVision.
This isn’t to say there’s no hope for alternative currencies, Ramesh said – there certainly is. Advertisers and media buyers just need more time to make sense of the different data from different providers. Calibration panels are only an assist.
