Home The Sell Sider Linear TV Audience Standards For Supply And Demand Are The Wrong Solution

Linear TV Audience Standards For Supply And Demand Are The Wrong Solution

SHARE:

The Sell Sider is a column written for the sell side of the digital media community.

 Today’s column is written by Amihai Ulman, founder and chief operating officer at MASS Exchange.

Unlike addressable media, linear TV publishers cannot sell single impressions or single units of attention. Due to its linear nature, TV publishers must sell mixed groups of audiences while buyers only target a specific segment.

The way buyers and sellers define value is different. Therefore, linear TV transactions are inherently more complicated than addressable media. There is no common language for defining value.

Buyers and sellers also do not speak the same language. Linear inventory sellers’ workflow focuses on what they can traffic and what they can sell: spots. Buyers want to tell their story to a specific group of people. This is not addressable media – this is linear media. As such, the trafficking systems “think” in terms of breaks and spots, but that is not exactly what buyers want to buy.

This language-difference problem is why some advocate for a standard definition of audiences. But I would argue that creating audience standards is not the solution that should be implemented by a modern market. A standard definition of audience is essentially a fixed, logical system.

Nearly all buyers already have very good processes and technology for audience definitions, as they have been buying digital audiences for nearly a decade. Sellers are further behind: They only have audience forecasting but lack audience-based inventory management, audience-based pricing and audience-based trafficking.

This reminds me of the early days of Yahoo vs. Google. Yahoo was a manually curated portal of topics, a standard organization created by humans. In comparison, Google realized that the way to organize the internet is by allowing it to define its own organization based on an internal voting mechanism. Google search results constantly changed as the internet changed. Like the Yahoo portal of the 1990s, a curated set of slow-changing and limited definitions will quickly hinder scale.

Standards mean centralized and external control of an inventory definition, which sellers must use to value and price their inventory. Linear trafficking systems can’t manage audience delivery. In other words, sellers would be expected to shoulder nearly all the new risk. Linear sellers are years away from the processes and systems required to enable linear and audience-based deals simultaneously, with any real automation.

If we try to approach the problem from a completely different angle, we may see a solution already exists. What linear TV buyers need is a great “audience search engine,” so they can find the linear media they want to buy without being forced into specific audience segment definitions. The translation of audience to linear demand is precisely what platforms such as 4C and VideoAmp are designed to do: to be that “audience search engine.” Buyers want to control how their audience data is translated into linear spots and sellers don’t want to manage linear trafficking by audience.

Follow MASS Exchange (@MassExchange) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Must Read

People Inc.'s Patrick McCarthy (right) chats with Mula's Jason White at AdMonsters' Sell Side Summit Austin.

For Publishers, AI Gives Monetizable Data Insight But Takes Away Traffic

Traffic-starved publishers are hopeful that their long-undervalued audience data will fuel advertising’s automated future – if only they can finally wrest control of the industry narrative away from ad tech middlemen.

Q3: The Trade Desk Delivers On Financials, But Is Its Vision Fact Or Fantasy?

The Trade Desk posted solid Q3 results on Thursday, with $739 million in revenue, up 18% year over year. But the main narrative for TTD this year is less about the numbers and more about optics and competitive dynamics.

Comic: He Sees You When You're Streaming

IP Address Match Rates Are a Joke – And It’s No Laughing Matter

According to a new report, IP-to-email matches are accurate just 16% of the time on average, while IP-to-postal matches are accurate only 13% of the time. (Oof.)

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters
Comic: Gamechanger (Google lost the DOJ's search antitrust case)

The DOJ And Google Sharpen Their Remedy Proposals As The Two Sides Prepare For Closing Arguments

The phrase “caution is key” has become a totem of the new age in US antitrust regulation. It was cited this week by both the DOJ and Google in support of opposing views on a possible divestiture of Google’s sell-side ad exchange.

create a network of points with nodes and connections, plain white background; use variations of green and grey for the dots and the connctions; 85% empty space

Alt Identity Provider ID5 Buys TrueData, Marking Its First-Ever Acquisition

ID5 bought TrueData mainly to tackle what ID5 CEO Mathieu Roche calls the “massive fragmentation” of digital identity, which is a problem on the user side and the provider side.

CTV Manufacturers Have A New Tool For Catching Spoofed Devices

The IAB Tech Lab’s new device attestation feature for its Open Measurement SDK provides a scaled way for original device manufacturers to confirm that ad impressions are associated with real devices.