“On TV & Video” is a column exploring opportunities and challenges in advanced TV and video.
Like it did for the web, programmatic is transforming linear TV ad buying. But TV calls for a more nuanced approach.
The programmatic technology that automates ad serving on TV will have to be different from the rest of the digital ad ecosystem, said Pooja Midha, EVP of Effectv, the ad sales division of Comcast Cable.
Midha took on the role in September after a stint as chief growth officer at Comcast Advertising, where she oversaw global marketing and strategy for both Effectv and Comcast-owned SSP FreeWheel. Now, as GM of Effectv, Midha is taking charge of Comcast’s efforts to help national and local linear TV advertisers transition into the world of connected TV (CTV).
Advertisers are starting to spend more on CTV not because streaming is killing linear, but because the two channels are bleeding into each other, she said, and marketers are still trying to figure out how to plan media buys and measure audiences accordingly.
The industry’s “attention is on streaming, but linear TV is still the behemoth of TV viewing time,” Midha said, “and it will be for quite a while.”
Midha spoke with AdExchanger.
AdExchanger: How are local and national TV advertisers approaching the shift to streaming?
POOJA MIDHA: Some linear buyers are extremely sophisticated and on the bleeding edge of addressable TV and digital-based buying.
But many other buyers are much newer to streaming. Those buyers are just starting to transition away from linear-only spots toward incorporating streaming impressions into their media buys. Their first step is more of a data-driven linear approach or implementing more data into the media planning process to try and maximize reach against network buys.
What happens to linear TV as more viewers embrace streaming?
Linear TV isn’t going away any time soon. FAST channels are where much of live TV viewing is going. The lines between live TV and on-demand video are blurring rapidly, and the common denominator is impression-based buying.
The challenge in the meantime is applying programmatic technology to automate media planning and buying in a way that works for TV.
What’s the biggest obstacle to applying programmatic technology to TV?
Programmatic technology was designed for a very different ecosystem – specifically, digital display and short-form video environments online that are awash in supply.
But ad inventory is much scarcer on television and mostly bought against direct deals, so programmatic buying needs to be applied differently for TV.
How so?
Programmatic buying is based on bidding, so it’ll be a long time before programmatic becomes the primary buying model for TV media as long as upfronts still exist.
But programmatic tech can be used to execute on deals negotiated directly, such as through private marketplaces or programmatic guaranteed deals. We’ll definitely see more buy-side demand for programmatic guaranteed from media partners because it’s just one hop away from doing a direct deal, which agencies are already used to.
Also, the TV ecosystem has different creative and ad quality standards than digital display or short-form video environments online, including advertiser expectations around competitive adjacency, category-based buying and media quality. Those buyer expectations aren’t going to erode, so programmatic TV will have to be a model that allows direct and programmatic-based demand to coexist.
How does this coexistence complicate measurement?
TV measurement is about counting audiences by impressions, but measurement goes astray when we start thinking impressions give the full picture.
There’s more that matters than the number of impressions sold against a CPM. The quality of the ad environment has to be considered. Brand lift and perception can even vary depending on where in a content stream an ad appears.
The media environment determines how impactful an ad impression will be, and impact is the whole point of advertising. Proving that impact, and crediting it properly, is where we as an industry have more work to do.
Buyers are asking for exactly that – more transparency into the environment of their media buys. How are publishers bridging that gap?
Publishers have to meet buyers where they are and provide them with a solution to meet their outcomes. There’s no one-size-fits-all answer, but it comes down to audience buying.
Some campaigns have KPIs that value context more highly than other campaigns, for example, and in those cases, advertisers buy against specific baskets of networks because they’ve determined it’s the best way to reach their audience. For those buyers, programming is a proxy for audience. Other buyers are looking more broadly for high-quality inventory to reach their audiences. Both types of buyers need publishers that can confidently develop and reach audience segments with high-quality data that considers engagement and attention.
Speaking of engagement and attention, what’s the best way to value an impression beyond just counting it?
That’s hard to say – there’s a ton of innovation happening in this space right now, which is really healthy for the industry. But regardless, new solutions have to be able to scale.
Attention is a good example. There are plenty of companies piecing together inference metrics based on eye tracking and calling it a proxy for attention. But for that to work, panels need to be representative and have the scale to back them up. I don’t think one company has necessarily cracked the code on attention yet, but this new metric is an example of new innovation in the TV space that I’m hoping will continue.
This interview has been edited and condensed.
For more articles featuring Pooja Midha, click here.
